Amedu Karim v Emanuel Kanamugira (CIVIL SUIT NO. 155 OF 2022)
Observed later treatment
Citator coverage is limited to judgments in the Wakilii corpus and source-matched treatment records. Absence of a signal is not an assertion that the case remains good law.
AI-generated summary. This summary was generated by AI from the full text of the judgment. It may contain errors or omissions—always read the source judgment before relying on it.
Holding
The High Court found the defendant in breach of contract for failing to deliver title and vacant possession of land after receiving UGX 13,000,000 as purchase price. The defendant fraudulently misrepresented ownership and disappeared after receiving payment. The court ordered refund of the purchase price with contractual interest at 2% per annum from 2009, general damages of UGX 15,000,000, and aggravated damages of UGX 30,000,000 for the defendant's high-handed and fraudulent conduct spanning over 15 years.
Outcome
Judgment entered for plaintiff with refund of purchase price, contractual interest, general damages, and aggravated damages awarded
Facts
On 17 February 2009, the plaintiff and defendant executed a sale agreement for 25 decimals of land on Plot 1890, Block 383 in Bwebajja at UGX 15,000,000. The defendant represented himself as the registered proprietor. The plaintiff paid UGX 13,000,000, with UGX 2,000,000 remaining payable upon delivery of title. The agreement provided for refund with 2% monthly interest if the plaintiff failed to enjoy quiet possession due to the defendant's act or omission. The defendant failed to deliver title or vacant possession and disappeared. He was subsequently arrested, prosecuted in criminal court, and ordered to refund the purchase price, which he did not do. An additional memorandum of agreement was executed on 27 October 2018, but the defendant again breached it and vanished. The matter proceeded ex parte after the defendant failed to file a defence despite substituted service by newspaper.
Issues
- Whether the Defendant breached the Sale Agreement and Memorandum of Agreement of 17th February 2009 and 27th October 2018?
- Whether the Defendant misrepresented and committed fraud in the Sale transaction?
- What remedies are available to the Parties?
Orders
- Defendant refunds the deposit on the purchase price of UGX 13,000,000 (Thirteen Million Only).
- Defendant pays interest on the sum above at the agreed rate of 2% per annum from February 2009 till refund of the deposit in full.
- Defendant pays to Plaintiff general damages of UGX 15,000,000 (Fifteen Million Only).
- Interest on general damages at 6% per annum from date of judgement till payment in full.
- Defendant pays to the Plaintiff aggravated damages of UGX 30,000,000 (Thirty Million Only).
- Interest at 6% per annum on aggravated damages from date of judgement till payment in full.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (3)
Cases cited (7)
- Ronald Kasibante v Shell Uganda Ltd (HCCS No. 542 of 2006)
- United Building Services Ltd v Yafesi Muzira t/a Quickset Builders & Co (HCCS No. 154 of 2005)
- Charles Lwanga v Centenary Rural Development Bank Ltd (CACA No. 30 of 1999)
- Uganda Commercial Bank v Kigozi [2002] 1 EA 305
- Bank of Uganda v Betty Tinkamanyire (SCCA No. 12 of 2007)
- Peter Owinyi Mwa v Okello George Odipe (Civil Suit No. 28 of 2019)
- Robert Coussens v Attorney General (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 8 of 1999)
Cases citing this judgment (1)
How later Ugandan judgments in the Wakilii corpus have cited this case. Treatment labels come from Sequitur — Uganda’s citator — each backed by a verbatim span from the citing judgment, and are not an assertion that this case is, or is not, good law.
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.